Follow-Up From Post 3631
Frank - Thankyou for your question. Sorry it has taken me a couple of days to respond. Multiple demands on my time beyond PPRuNe. Actually, I plan to answer your question in a second posting (after this one). The reason for that is to be found in my recent post No.3631 on this thread in which I referred to claims made in a newspaper article dating from late July which is unfortunately no longer accessible via its original link. The good news is that I have now located alternative coverage of the same news-story. It is logical to first report back on that as I promised, then answer your question with this new information taken into account.
The story was entitled: Airports Commission Accused of Burying Evidence. The version I printed off originated from Putneysw15.com, but there are alternative sources reporting the story. The gist of the story is that the Airports Commission "were hell bent on presenting Heathrow as the best option".
The report arises from the discovery of a letter penned by two of the commission's expert advisers which calls into question the reliability of growth forecasts used to justify the recommendation. These two advisers are named as Professor Peter Mackie and Mr Brian Pearce. They take issue with the forecast produced by PWC which suggests that LHR R3 (NW) will add £147Bn to GDP in a timeframe of 60 years.
According to PM and BP, the methodology used by PWC to reach this conclusion is experimental and has never been tested against a live project. Using the government's established approach to economic modelling, the predicted number for LHR expansion is £33.6 - 54.8Bn. In their letter, they warn that the PWC figures include "a high degree of overlap between the direct and wider impacts ... double counting ... and rely on economic growth and other assumptions which are at the extreme end of the range."
PM and BP highlight the risk of "exaggeration by media" if care is not taken to caveat these figures. Using the £147Bn figure could mislead the public and "qualifiers such as up to do not give a flavour of the likely median or mean outcome across the economic scenarios."
In response to these claims, a number of council leaders issued comments. Typical amongst these is Wandsworth Council Leader Ravi Govindia: "It's clear the commission has based its recommendation to expand Heathrow on a grossly exaggerated economic case. Their own expert advisers tore apart the PWC growth forecasts but their evidence was buried and ignored. Sir Howard and his team were hell bent on presenting Heathrow as the best option and refused to let reality get in the way."
Well, what a story. Curious that it did not (apparently) receive broader coverage beyond the local news in afew London boroughs.
I would like to extend my thanks to regular PPRuNe contributor 'MANFOD' for drawing my attention to the original 'South London Today' coverage of this story.